What happened
In July 2010 a young child entered the outside area of the play structure and became trapped at height. After handing the child down to his parents, the plaintiff fell about two metres, worsening a pre-existing wrist condition that affected his work as a chef.
The issues
The liability issue was whether reasonable precautions should have prevented a gate being left open to young children. Quantum required the Court to disentangle the new aggravation from the earlier wrist injury and reassess earning capacity and domestic assistance.
The court's decision
The Court found that precautions such as a self-closing or locked gate would probably have prevented the child's entry. It rejected the objection that the plaintiff was advancing a new case on appeal and substituted judgment and trial and appeal costs in his favour.
Understanding the figures
The AUD 179,000 award comprised non-economic loss of 32,000, past economic loss of 31,000, future economic loss of 75,000, future domestic care of 30,000 and medical expenses of 11,000. The trial judge's hypothetical assessment was not an award; the substituted judgment took effect from 16 April 2014.
What this case shows
The case illustrates liability to a rescuer where negligence exposes a child to danger. It also shows that continuing to work long hours does not necessarily disprove a loss of earning capacity caused by pain and restricted function.
Why another case may differ
Liability to the rescuer was accepted if negligence causing the child's predicament was shown, and contributory negligence was not pursued at trial. The historical assessment accounted for progression of the pre-existing wrist injury and does not establish a standard outcome for rescue or wrist-injury claims.
Applying it to your claim
Different facts, evidence or procedures, an appeal, or a change in the law may affect how this decision applies. This is general information, not a report of a case handled by Park & Co Lawyers.
Considering a second opinion? →